DO PROCESS INNOVATIONS BOOST SMES

PRODUCTIVITY GROWTH?

JUAN A. MAÑEZ MARÍA E. ROCHINA BARRACHINA

AMPARO SANCHIS LLOPIS JUAN A. SANCHIS LLOPIS

FUNDACIÓN DE LAS CAJAS DE AHORROS DOCUMENTO DE TRABAJO

Nº 475/2009

De conformidad con la base quinta de la convocatoria del Programa

de Estímulo a la Investigación, este trabajo ha sido sometido a eva-

luación externa anónima de especialistas cualificados a fin de con-

trastar su nivel técnico. ISSN: 1988-8767 La serie DOCUMENTOS DE TRABAJO incluye avances y resultados de investigaciones dentro de los pro-

gramas de la Fundación de las Cajas de Ahorros.

Las opiniones son responsabilidad de los autores.

1

DO PROCESS INNOVATIONS BOOST SMES PRODUCTIVITY GROWTH?

Juan A. Mañez*

María E. Rochina Barrachina ** Amparo Sanchis Llopis ***

Juan A. Sanchis Llopis ****

Abstract

In this paper we explore in depth the effect of process innovations on total factor productivity growth for small and medium enterprises (SMEs), taking into account the potential endogeneity problem that may be caused by self selection into these activities. First, we analyse whether the ex-ante most productive SMEs are those that start introducing process innovations; then, we test whether process innovations boost SMEs productivity growth using matching techniques to control for the possibility that selection into introducing process innovations may not be a random process. We use a sample of Spanish manufacturing SMEs for the period 1991-2002, drawn from the Encuesta sobre Estrategias Empresariales. Our results show that the introduction of process innovations yields an extra productivity growth, and that the life span of this extra productivity growth has an inverted U-shaped form.

Keywords: Process innovations, TFP, stochastic dominance, matching techniques.

JEL Classification: O31, D24, C14

* Juan A. Máñez, Universidad de Valencia and ERI-CES, Facultad de Economía, Departamento de Economía Aplicada II, Avda. de los Naranjos, s/n, 46022 Valencia, Spain, telephone 96 3828356, Fax 96 3828354, e-mail: jamc@uv.es. ** María E. Rochina Barrachina, Universidad de Valencia and ERI-CES, Facultad de Economía, Departamento de Economía Aplicada II, Avda. de los Naranjos, s/n, 46022 Valencia, Spain, telephone 96 3828850, Fax 96 3828354, e-mail: erochina@uv.es. *** Amparo Sanchis Llopis, Universidad de Valencia and ERI-CES, Facultad de Economía, Departamento de Economía Aplicada II, Avda. de los Naranjos, s/n, 46022 Valencia, Spain, telephone 96 3828356, Fax 96 3828354, e-mail: sanchisa@uv.es. **** Juan A. Sanchis Llopis, Universidad de Valencia and ERI-CES, Facultad de Economía, Departamento de Economía Aplicada II, Avda. de los Naranjos, s/n, 46022 Valencia, Spain, telephone 96 3828356, Fax 96 3828354, e-mail: sanchisl@uv.es

Acknowledgment: Financial support from the Spanish Ministry of Science and Technology (project numbers ECO2008-04576/ECON and ECO2008-06395-C05-03) is gratefully acknowledged. We are grateful to participants in the 2nd Workshop on Entrepreneurship Statistics (Huelva, Spain), and the 7th Annual International Industrial Organization Conference (Boston). We would also like to thank Fundación SEPI for providing the data. Usual disclaimers apply.

2

1. Introduction.

It has been broadly recognised the role of small and medium enterprises (SMEs

henceforth) as a driving force for economic growth. SMEs are crucial to the

revitalization of the economy, and to the preservation and generation of employment,

what is especially important when the economy undergoes severe circumstances.

Fostering SMEs productivity, as a way to ensure their survival and growth in the

economy, is therefore a major issue, both to managers and policy makers. Amongst

the determinants of firms productivity growth, the key role of innovation has also been

generally acknowledged, starting with the seminal works of Schumpeter (1934, 1942)

and his concept of creative destruction as the mechanism driving and shaping the

evolution of markets and economic growth.

A number of empirical papers have analysed the links between firms’ innovation

output and productivity growth using a production function approach. A remarkable

example of this approach is Crépon et al. (1998), where the production function

includes innovation output (patents per employee or the share of innovative sales) as a

determinant of productivity growth. In this line, Verspagen (1999), Gu and Tang (2003),

Huergo and Jaumandreu (2004), Parisi et al. (2006), Griffith et al. (2006), Lee and

Kang (2007), and Rochina-Barrachina et al. (2008), considering direct measures of

innovation output (such as patents, products or process innovations), find that process

innovations have a positive impact on firms productivity. However, despite the

acknowledgement of this positive relationship, little is known about the direction of

causality between firms’ process innovations and productivity. In particular, do process

innovations enhance firms’ productivity growth, or are the most productive firms

becoming process innovators, or both? Discerning the direction of this causality is

important in order to draw conclusions that may guide firms’ strategies.

In this paper we depart from previous studies by explicitly exploring the causal

links between process innovations and productivity, that is, by taking into account the

potential endogeneity problem characterizing this relationship: the introduction of

process innovations may increase SMEs’ productivity, but it may also be the case that

only the most productive SMEs are able to generate the resources needed to

implement process innovations. To properly assess the impact of the introduction of

process innovations on firms’ productivity, dealing with this problem of endogeneity

constitutes an econometric challenge, and in this paper we address this issue using

appropriate econometric techniques.

The aim of this paper is to explore in depth the direct effect of process

innovations on total factor productivity (TFP, hereafter) for SMEs. In particular, we aim

to analyze both the extent and the life span of the productivity gains brought about by

3

the introduction of process innovations, taking into account the potential endogeneity

problem between process innovation and productivity growth. In order to do this, we

proceed in two steps. Firstly, we analyse whether the ex-ante most productive SMEs

are those that start introducing process innovations. Second, we test whether process

innovations boost SMEs productivity growth using matching techniques to control for

the possibility that selection into introducing process innovations may not be a random

process.

To perform the analysis, we use data on SMEs drawn from the Encuesta sobre

Estrategias Empresariales (ESEE, hereafter) for the period 1991-2002. This survey

data is representative of Spanish manufacturing SMEs classified by industrial sectors

and size categories.1 The panel data nature of the data set allows classifying SMEs

according to their process innovation patterns over time and to analyze the extent and

the life span of the impact of process innovations on SMEs productivity growth. The

empirical work is carried out using both stochastic dominance and matching

techniques.

Our paper contributes to the empirical literature dealing with the measurement

of the impact of innovation output on productivity growth using firm level data. To our

knowledge, this paper is the first to look at the productivity gains from introducing

process innovations at the firm level using matching techniques to deal with the

potential endogeneity problem that may arise from self selection into these activities.

To anticipate our results, we find that the introduction of process innovations

yields a delayed (not contemporaneous) extra productivity growth to a SME

implementing a process innovation for the first time, as compared to a SME that does

not introduce process innovations, and that this extra productivity growth has an

inverted U-shaped form. These findings shed light on the understanding of the links

between process innovation and SMEs productivity growth and thus may serve to

assist not only the design of management strategies but also more effective policies to

promote SMEs.

The rest of the paper is organized as follows. Section 2 briefly describes the

relationship between process innovations and SMEs productivity. Section 3 presents

the data. Section 4 analyses whether the ex-ante most productive SMEs are those that

start introducing process innovations. Section 5 examines whether process innovations

boost SMEs productivity growth. Finally, section 6 concludes.

1 The ESEE does not include SMEs with less than 10 employees. Therefore, given the sampling procedure of this survey, we consider as SMEs those firms having between 10 and 200 employees. See section 3 for details.

4

2. Process innovations and productivity for SMEs.

Our focus in this paper is to analyse the impact of process innovations on SMEs’

productivity. On theoretical grounds, there are, at least, three strands in the literature

supporting a positive relationship between the introduction of process innovations and

firms’ productivity growth. The first strand is based on the well-known R&D capital

stock model of Griliches (1979) that analyses the relationship among R&D investments,

achievement of innovations and productivity growth. Since this seminal work, other

authors have incorporated more explicitly the role of process innovations on

productivity growth. For instance, Klette and Johansen (1998) incorporated the output

elasticity of knowledge capital to point out the opportunity for process innovations, and

Smolny (1998) assumed that process innovations reduce production costs by

increasing the productivity of labour and/or capital. The second strand in the literature

rendering theoretical support to the relationship between process innovations and

productivity growth is the active learning model (Ericson and Pakes, 1992, 1995, and

Pakes and Ericson, 1998). According to this model, R&D investments, if successful,

contribute to improve firm’ productivity over time. If the successful output of firms R&D

activities is the production of a process innovation and this is actually implemented, we

expect an increase in the productivity growth of such a firm. Therefore, in the active

learning model the relationship between R&D activities and productivity growth runs

through the achievement and implementation of process innovations. Finally,

endogenous growth theory is the third strand of the literature stressing the importance

of innovations for productivity growth (see, e.g., Romer, 1990, Aghion and Howitt,

1992).

Our interest in SMEs is not only because they have grown into an important

force in the world economy, but also because the introduction of process innovations

may constitute an important source of competitive advantage for these companies, as

compared to their larger counterparts. In the case of Spain, SMEs represent 96.78% of

total firms, 64.08% of total employment, 53.08% of total sales and 33.78% of total R&D

expenditures. Given their organizational simplicity, SMEs may implement process

innovations faster and at lower switching costs than large firms (Buckley and Mirza,

1997). In addition, due to the limited resources and small scale production, SMEs may

find easier to follow an innovation strategy aimed at obtaining direct rewards in terms of

productivity, such as process innovations, rather than investing huge amounts in the

development of sophisticated R&D projects, and indeed, there is empirical evidence

supporting the view that SMEs are process innovation oriented (see Acs and

Audretsch, 1990, Baldwin, 1997, Smolny, 1998, among others). Thus, for a number of

5

reasons, the introduction of process innovations may be considered as an important

tool of strategic management for SMEs.2

3. Data, productivity and process innovation status for SMEs.

The data used in this paper are drawn from the ESEE for the period 1991-2002. This is

an annual survey that is representative of Spanish manufacturing firms classified by

industrial sectors and size categories. It provides exhaustive information at the firm

level, including information on innovation activities performed by firms. As for SMEs,

the sampling procedure of the ESEE excluded those firms with less than 10

employees, and firms with 10 to 200 employees were randomly sampled, holding

around 5% of the population in 1990. Important efforts have been made to minimise

attrition and to annually incorporate new firms with the same sampling criteria as in the

base year, so that the sample of firms remains representative of the Spanish

manufacturing SMEs over time.3 The total sample of SMEs corresponding to the period

1991-2002, is made up of 12929 observations. This means an annual average of 1077

SMEs throughout the entire period.

The panel nature of the dataset allows classifying SMEs according to their process

innovation activities over time. The particular question in the ESEE is as follows:

“Indicate if during 199X the firm introduced some important modification of the

productive process (process innovation)”.

To measure productivity we use a TFP index. This is calculated at the firm level

using a multilateral productivity index that is an extension of the Caves et al. (1982)

index.4 The information provided by the ESEE allows us to deflate both output and

inputs using, correspondingly, firm individual price indexes drawn from the survey. This

allows controlling for the possibility of output and input prices not only being different or

evolving differently over time for process innovators than non innovators but also

between firms, irrespective to their process innovation status. Therefore, our TFP

measure to some extent reflects firm differences in market conditions.

We select those SMEs that report information both on the process innovation

question and on all the variables involved in the construction of the productivity

2 There is also empirical evidence showing that large firms are more process R&D-oriented, as compared to other innovation strategies, than small firms (see, e.g. Davies, 1979, Sherer, 1991, Pavitt et al., 1987, Cohen and Klepper, 1996). However, this is not inconsistent with the fact that SMEs are more prone to implement process innovations. 3 See http://www.funep.es/esee/ing/i_esee.asp for further details. 4 This extension was developed in Good et al. (1996) and Delgado et al. (2002). It may also be found in Máñez et al. (2005) and Rochina-Barrachina et al. (2008).

6

measure. Applying this criterion we end up with a sample of 11626 observations (see

Table 1).5

Table 1. Yearly number of SMEs and process innovators

Years Total Process innovators 1991 683 205 1992 848 260 1993 985 301 1994 967 302 1995 910 269 1996 969 272 1997 1129 374 1998 1036 353 1999 1068 338 2000 1049 333 2001 991 269 2002 991 237 Total 1991-2002 11626 3513

In order to get a first picture of the relationship between process innovations and

SMEs productivity, we check whether SMEs introducing process innovations present

higher productivity levels than SMEs that do not introduce them.

Figure 1 displays the relative distribution functions of TFP for SMEs process

innovators in t and non process innovators in t, respectively, for each year of the period

1991-2002.6 These figures represent the equivalence between each of the quantiles of

the TFP distribution for SMEs that have achieved process innovations in the quantile

scale of the TFP distribution for non-process innovators SMEs. The diagonal

represents the uniform distribution [0,1], i.e. the relative distribution if both distributions

were identical. The position of the relative distribution below the diagonal suggests that

the distribution represented in the vertical axis stochastically dominates the distribution

in the horizontal axis. In particular, the relative TFP distribution for process innovating

SMEs lies below the diagonal for ten out of twelve years (except for 1991 and 1992),

suggesting that the TFP distribution for SMEs process innovating in t stochastically

dominates that for the non-process innovators in each period t.

5 We do not use any observation for 1990 as we cannot compute TFP for this year in the survey. 6 See Handcock and Morris (1999) for the technical details about relative distributions.

7

Figure 1. Yearly relative TFP distribution functions of process innovators in t to non-process innovators in t.

0.1

.2.3

.4.5

.6.7

.8.9

1P

roce

ss in

nova

tors

qu

antil

es

0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 .8 .9 1Non-process innovators quantiles

U(0,1)

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

On the basis of the observed differences in Figure 1, we formally test whether the

TFP distribution of SMEs process innovators in t stochastically dominates the TFP

distribution of non process innovators in t. Thus, for each time period, we compare

t t t tF y vs G y t. , 1991,...,2002 (1)

using the Kolmogorov-Smirnov (KS, hereafter) one and two-sided tests, where Ft and

Gt are the yearly TFP distribution functions for SMEs process innovators and non

process innovators in t, respectively.7

Table 2 shows the results for the KS tests for TFP differentials. We reject the null

hypothesis of equality of the two distributions (at a 5% significance level) for all years,

except for 1991 and 1992. Further, we can never reject the null that the TFP of SMEs

implementing process innovations in t is higher than that of non-process innovators.

Thus, in general terms, process innovators are more productive in terms of TFP than

non-process innovators.

7 See Delgado et al. (2002) for a description of the application of the Kolmogorov-Smirnov tests for the testing of stochastic dominance.

8

Table 2. Yearly TFP differences between SMEs process innovators in t and non-process innovators in t.

Number of observations Equality of distributions Differences favourable to process

innovators

Year

Process innovators Non-process innovators

TFP differencesa

Statistic p-value Statistic p-value

1991 205 478 0.002 0.387 0.998 0.309 0.826 1992 260 588 0.026 0.970 0.272 0.206 0.918 1993 301 684 0.068 1.866 0.001 0.098 0.981 1994 302 665 0.054 2.164 0.000 0.022 0.999 1995 269 641 0.066 2.095 0.000 0.086 0.985 1996 272 697 0.045 2.001 0.000 0.257 0.876 1997 374 755 0.067 2.644 0.000 0.021 0.999 1998 353 683 0.054 2.094 0.000 0.003 1.000 1999 338 730 0.053 2.719 0.000 0,092 0.983 2000 333 716 0.036 1.809 0.002 0,069 0.990 2001 269 722 0.037 2.206 0.000 0,306 0.829 2002 237 754 0.060 2.419 0.000 0,175 0.941

a TFP differences (between both groups of SMEs) are calculated at the median of the distributions.

9

4. Self selection of the most productive SMEs into implementing process

innovations.

We now proceed to check whether among non-process innovators today, those that

will introduce process innovations in the future are ex-ante more productive than those

that will not. If (future) process innovators are ex-ante more productive, one would find

that these firms would experience higher productivity in the future even without

introducing process innovations. We want to test whether the most productive SMEs

self select into obtaining process innovations. On theoretical and empirical grounds, we

expect the productivity level of process innovators to be not lower than that of non-

process innovators as: (i) the expenditures associated to innovation activities (both

formal and informal) limit the access to innovation activities to the most productive

firms;8 and, (ii) performing innovation activities might be a previous condition to obtain

process innovations.9

Thus, as a first step, we test for non-random selection into implementing process

innovation, that is, we first test whether among non-process innovators in t-1, those

introducing process innovations in t are more productive in t-1. In order to do so, we

compare TFP (previous to obtaining a process innovation) of SMEs implementing a

process innovation for the first time, with TFP of non-process innovators. We define

first-time process innovating SMEs in t as those SMEs that implement a process

innovation for the first time (in our sample period) in period t; and, as non-process

innovators those SMEs that have not implemented a process innovation until t-1, and

do not implement it at time t either. However, the small size of first-time process

innovators cohorts between 1992 and 2002 (reported in table 3) suggests not carrying

out year-by-year KS tests as their results would be scarcely reliable.

8 This is especially relevant for the case of R&D investments due to its sunk costs nature (Sutton, 1991, Máñez et al., 2009). 9 Some support for the self-selection hypothesis into R&D activities (formal part of innovation activities) of the most productive firms can be found, among others, in Hall, 1990 (who uses a financial constraint argument), González and Jaumandreu, 1998, González et al., 1999, and Máñez et al., 2005.

10

Table 3. Yearly number of SMEs first-time process innovators. Year 1992 47 1993 51 1994 36 1995 30 1996 21 1997 28 1998 43 1999 26 2000 24 2001 33 2002 12

Total 1992-2002a 351 a We do not report data for 1991 as we need to start the test from 1992 onwards to calculate t-1 TFP.

To overcome this limitation we apply this test jointly for the whole sample period.

Therefore, we compare,

F z vs G z1991,...,2001 1991,...,2001 1991,...,2001 1991,...,2001. (2)

where F1991,…,2001 is the previous TFP distribution of the eleven cohorts of first-time

process innovators, and G1991,…,2001 is the yearly average TFP distribution over the

period 1991-2001 for the non-process innovators.

To obtain the previous TFP distribution function of first-time process innovators

we follow two alternative approaches. In the first one, this distribution is calculated

using TFP in t-1 of first-time process innovators in t, for t = 1992,…, 2002. In the

second approach, this distribution is constructed with the previous average TFP,

starting from the first year a SME is observed in the sample until t-1.

Figures 2(a) and 2(b) map the kernel estimates of the cumulative previous TFP

distribution functions of first-time process innovators and non-process innovators using

the two alternative approaches defined above. We may observe from the figures that,

independently of the approach used to calculate previous TFP distribution of first-time

process innovators, the distribution of first-time process innovators is to the right of that

of non-process innovators, suggesting that SMEs that eventually introduce process

innovations had higher TFP levels than non-process innovators previously to

implementing a process innovation.

11

Figure 2. Comparing the TFP growth of first-time process innovators and non-process innovators.

0.2

5.5

.75

1C

umul

ativ

e pr

obab

ility

-2 -1 0 1 2Productivity

Non-process innovat. First-time process innovat.

(a):TFP. en t-1

0.2

5.5

.75

1C

umu

lativ

e p

rob

abili

ty

-2 -1 0 1 2Productivity

Non-process innovat. First-time process innovat.

(b): Mean TFP up to t-1

Further, the results of formal KS tests of stochastic dominance using the two

approaches described above confirm the patterns of stochastic dominance suggested

by our graphical regularities (see Table 4). Thus, regardless the approach considered,

we always reject the null hypothesis of equality of TFP distributions and we cannot

reject the null hypothesis (at any reasonable significance level) of favourable

differences to first-time process innovators. Therefore, the KS tests indicate that SMEs

that eventually introduce process innovations exhibited higher previous TFP levels than

their non-process innovators counterparts. Thus, we find evidence on the existence of

non-random selection into the introduction of process innovations that should be taken

into account when analyzing the effects of process innovations in SMEs productivity

growth.10

10 Rochina-Barrachina et al. (2008) also found evidence of self selection into the introduction of process innovations by the most productive Spanish manufacturing firms for the period 1991-1998.

12

Table 4. Comparison of previous TFP of SMEs first-time process innovators and non-process innovators.

Equality of distributions Favourable diff. to first-time process

innovators

First-time process

innovators

Non-process innovators

TFP diffs.a Statistic p-value Statistic p-value

TFP in t-1 for first-time process innovators

351 334 0.061 1.969 0.004 0.050 0.995

Mean previous TFP for first-time process innovators

351 334 0.052 1.843 0.016 0.215 0.912

a TFP differences (between both groups of SMEs) are calculated at the median of the distributions.

13

5. Do process innovations boost SMEs productivity growth?

If selection into introducing process innovations is endogenous, it is not appropriate to

assess the impact of introducing process innovations on SMEs productivity growth by

simply comparing the TFP growth of first-time process innovators and non-process

innovators, since the ex-ante more productive first-time process innovators would

experience higher productivity in the future even without introducing any process

innovation. To properly control for the direction of causality from implementing process

innovations to productivity growth, one needs to use a methodology that explicitly

takes into account this endogenous selection process.11

More formally, let y denote the growth rate of TFP and Dit {0, 1} be an

indicator of whether SME i is a first-time process innovator in period t (as opposed to a

non-process innovator). Therefore, we can use i t sy1( 1) to define the TFP growth

between t-1 and (t-1)+s, s>0, for SME i classified as first-time process innovator in t,

and i t sy0( 1) as the TFP growth for SME i should it had not implemented any process

innovation. Thus, the causal effect of implementing a first process innovation for SME i

at time period (t-1)+s may be defined as

i t s i t sy y1 0( 1) ( 1) (3)

Following the policy/treatment evaluation literature (see Heckman et al., 1997),

we may define the average effect of implementing a process innovation for the first

time on SMEs productivity as

i t s i t s it i t s it i t s itE y y D E y D E y D1 0 1 0( 1) ( 1) ( 1) ( 1)| 1 | 1 | 1 (4)

The main problem of causal inference is that in observational studies the

counterfactual i t sy0( 1) for a SME that introduced a process innovation is not

observed, and therefore it has to be generated. Thus, causal inference relies on the

construction of the counterfactual for this term, which is the average productivity growth

that first time-process innovators would have experienced had they not implemented

any process innovation. We overcome this problem using matching techniques to

identify, among the pool of non-process innovators in t, those with a distribution of

observable variables (X in t-1) affecting productivity growth and the probability of

implementing a process innovation, as similar as possible to that of first-time process

innovators in t-1. It is then assumed that, conditional on X, SMEs with the same

11 The advantage of using matching techniques to evaluate the impact of process innovations on productivity (i.e., that process innovations cause productivity growth) is that one explicitly accounts for the potential non-random selection process of introducing process innovations by firms. Therefore, with matching techniques we control for the potential endogeneity between process innovations and productivity allowing to isolate the causal effect. This is a very difficult task when using any other technique (even if one uses an instrumental variables approach).

14

characteristics have a random probability to implement a process innovation. Thus,

i t s i t s it itE y y X D1 0( 1) ( 1) 1| , 1 in expression (4) may be rewritten as

1 01 1 1 11 0i t s it it i t s it itE y X D E y X D( ) ( )| , | , (5)

Since the set of observable variables that may potentially affect the SMEs

probability of implementing a process innovation and their productivity growth is quite

large, we need to deal with the choice of the appropriate variables to match SMEs, and

their appropriate weights. We solve this problem using the propensity score techniques

proposed by Rosenbaum and Rubin (1983). Adapted to process innovations, it may be

shown that if implementing a first process innovation is random conditioning upon X, it

is also random conditioning on the probability of implementing a process innovation.

Therefore, before performing the matching procedure, we obtain the probability

of implementing a process innovation for the first time (propensity score) as the

predicted probability in the following probit model

it itP D F X 11 (6)

In our probit model, we control for past productivity and other lagged firm

characteristics. The most important variable in the propensity score estimation is

lagged productivity, as it allows controlling for the self selection of the most productive

firms into process innovation activities. Further, by including other firm variables that

could be linked to higher productivity we ensure that productivity growth differentials

between firms introducing process innovations and their non-process innovators

counterparts are driven by the introduction of process innovations.12 Both the results

from the probit and the set of observable characteristics included in Xit-1 are in Table

A.1 in the Appendix.

With the aim of ensuring the robustness of our results, to construct the

counterfactual we have used three different types of matching, namely, nearest

neighbours, radius matching and kernel matching. Nearest neighbours matches first-

time process innovators with an average of the k non-process innovators with the

closest propensity score. Radius matching matches first-time process innovators with

an average of the non-process innovators within a given radius. Kernel matching

matches first-time process innovators with a weighted average of some (all) non-

process innovators, with weights inversely proportional to the distance between the

propensity score of first-time process innovators and non-process innovators.13

12 Our TFP index itself also allows controlling for industry factors that may condition firms’ productivity. The TFP index of Good et al. (1996) and Delgado et al. (2002), by considering a different reference firm across industries eliminates possible differences in TFP across industries. 13 Matching is performed using the Stata psmatch2 command (Leuven and Sianesi, 2003). Since we have previously estimated the propensity scores, p-values corresponding to the extra-productivity growth (EPG)

15

We compare, using matching techniques, the productivity growth of first-time

process innovators and matched non-process innovators for the periods t-1 to t, t to

t+1, t+1 to t+2, t+2 to t+3 and t+3 to t+4. Table 5 reports the results of these

comparisons. To check the matching quality we present in Table 6 the indicators of the

resulting balancing of the observable variables within the matched samples, in

summary form.

Table 5: Estimates of extra productivity growth for first-time process innovators Period Matching method EPG s.e. Obs t-1/t Nearest neighbours (A&I) -0.0170 0.0138 345(1319) Nearest neighbours (ss) -0.0170 0.0147 345(1319) Radius matching -0.0185 0.0137 345(1319) Kernel matching -0.0178 0.0136 345(1319) t/t+1 Nearest neighbours (A&I) 0.0360* 0.0199 195(1319) Nearest neighbours (ss) 0.0360* 0.0219 195(1319) Radius matching 0.0357** 0.0206 195(1319) Kernel matching 0.0368** 0.0201 195(1319) t+1/t+2 Nearest neighbours (A&I) 0.0483*** 0.0164 132(1319) Nearest neighbours (ss) 0.0483*** 0.0190 132(1319) Radius matching 0.0488*** 0.0173 132(1319) Kernel matching 0.0484*** 0.0170 132(1319) t+2/t+3 Nearest neighbours (A&I) 0.0295** 0.0142 93(1319) Nearest neighbours (ss) 0.0295** 0.0149 93(1319) Radius matching 0.0291** 0.0151 93(1319) Kernel matching 0.0292** 0.0147 93(1319) t+3/t+4 Nearest neighbours (A&I) -0.0154 0.0200 68(1319) Nearest neighbours (ss) -0.0154 0.0220 68(1319) Radius matching -0.0151 0.0202 68(1319) Kernel matching -0.0151 0.0201 68(1319)

Notes: 1. EPG stands for extra productivity growth of first-time process innovators over matched non-

process innovators. 2. A&I means that standard errors have been calculated using Abadie and Imbens (2006)

correction. 3. ss means that in the estimation with nearest neighbours we calculate sub-sampling based

standard errors (2000 draws). For radius and kernel matching we use bootstrapped standard errors (2000 replications).

4. Kernel estimation uses the Epanechnikov Kernel. 5. Obs. stands for observations: number of first-time process innovators and number of control

observations in parentheses imposing common support. 6. *, **, *** indicates significance at 10%, 5% and 1% level, respectively.

are calculated using bootstrapping techniques with 2000 replications for kernel and radius matching. However, Abadie and Imbens (2006) show that due to the extreme non-smoothness of nearest neighbours matching, the standard conditions for bootstrap are not satisfied, leading the bootstrap variance to diverge from the actual variance. This may be corrected either by subsampling (Politis et al., 1999) or using the Stata nnmatch command (Abadie, Drukker, Herr and Imbens, 2004).

16

Table 6. Covariate balancing indicators before and after matching. N and % lost to common support

N % lost to common support t-1/t 345 t/t+1 195

t+1/t+2 132 t+2/t+3 93 t+3/t+4 68

0.575 0.510 0.752 1.063 1.449

Probit pseudo R2 After

Before NN Radius Kernel t-1/t 0.063 0.004 0.004 0.002 t/t+1 0.041 0.004 0.004 0.002

t+1/t+2 0.052 0.018 0.016 0.015 t+2/t+3 0.050 0.023 0.017 0.016 t+3/t+4 0.054 0.042 0.030 0.032

P 2

After Before NN Radius Kernel

t-1/t 0.000 0.931 0.918 0.986 t/t+1 0.000 0.985 0.988 0.999

t+1/t+2 0.000 0.672 0.772 0.795 t+2/t+3 0.000 0.747 0.882 0.897 t+3/t+4 0.000 0.537 0.776 0.744

Median After

Before NN Radius Kernel t-1/t 25.336 3.682 1.713 2.667 t/t+1 17.947 2.743 2.421 1.985

t+1/t+2 25.147 6.667 4.340 6.101 t+2/t+3 26.196 7.334 5.954 4.472 t+3/t+4 23.807 13.994 8.418 6.340

Notes: (1) NN stands for nearest neighbours matching (2) The number of controls which are used to match treated is 1319. (3) Pseudo R2 from probit of treatment (implementing a process innovation in our case) on covariates

before matching and in matched samples (after matching). (4) 2P is the p-value of the likelihood-ratio test after matching, testing the hypothesis that the

regressors are jointly insignificant, i.e. that are well balanced in the two samples. (5) Median bias refers to median absolute standardised bias before and after matching, the median

is calculated taking over all regressors. Following Rosenbaum and Rubin (1985), for a given covariate, the standardised difference before matching is the difference of the sample means in the full treated and non-treated subsamples as a percentage of the square root of the average of the sample variances in the full treated and non-treated groups. The standardised difference after matching is the difference of the sample means in the matched treated (i.e., inside the common support) and matched non-treated subsamples as a percentage of the square root of the average of the sample variances in the full treated and non-treated groups.

(6) The % lost to common support is the share of the treated group falling outside of the common support, imposed at boundaries.

We may describe our results using Figure 3. In the vertical axis of this figure we

represent TFP, and in the horizontal axis the sequence of time from t-1 onwards. The

analysis of self-selection into the introduction of process innovations suggested that the

previous TFP level of SMEs that eventually introduce a process innovation is higher

than that of non-process innovators. As a result, the intercept of the first-time process

17

innovators (FTPI) line is higher than that of the non-process innovators (NPI) line

(A>A’).

Figure 3: Summary of results.

Regardless of the matching procedure, our results suggest that implementing a

process innovation for the first time does not guarantee immediate productivity

rewards, thus between t-1 and t the slope () is the same for the FTPI and NPI lines.

However, after its implementation, as operating experience is gained (i.e. with

“learning-by-using” the new process), the process innovation is improved and

developed and this in turn results in an extra productivity growth for process innovators

in the subsequent periods t/t+1, t+1 to t+2 and t+2 to t+3. Thus, in Figure 3, the slope

of the FTPI line for the subperiods t to t+1, t+1 to t+2 and t+2 to t+3 (1, 2 and 3,

respectively) is greater than the slope of the NPI line (). Further, this extra productivity

growth that starts at 3.6% from t to t+1 reaches its maximum at 4.8% from t+1 to t+2,

and then decreases to 2.9% from t+3 to t+4 (see Table 5). Therefore, in Figure 3 the

slope of the FTPI line for the t+1/t+2 subperiod is higher than that corresponding to the

t/t+1 and t+2/t+3 subperiods (2>1 and 2>3). It is clear from Figure 3 that introducing

a process innovation increases the productivity gap with respect to non process

innovators.

Our results also imply that after 3 years from the introduction of the process

innovation the extra TFP growth of FTPI ceases, and therefore, in Figure 3, the slope

of FTPI and NPI lines is the same from t+3 onwards (regardless of the matching

procedure, there is no difference between the productivity growth of FTPI and NPI).

This result suggests that as the process innovation is fully developed and exploited

t-1 t+1 t+1 t+3 t

FTPI

First-time process innovators

Non-process innovators

NPI

2

1

3

TFP

Time

A

A’

18

within the firm its potential for productivity improvement gradually fades away, so that

the path of TFP growth both for process and non-process innovators converges.

Finally, Figure 4 illustrates how our results reveal an inverted U-shaped relationship

between the extra productivity growth (in %) of FTPI over NPI, and the time elapsed

from the introduction of a process innovation. This inverted U-shaped relationship

suggests the following: (i) implementing a process innovation for the first time does not

guarantee contemporaneous productivity rewards; (ii) the productivity gains require

more than one year after implementing the process innovation to take place; and, (iii)

the extra-productivity growth of first-time process innovators reaches its maximum two

years after the introduction of the process innovation, then decreases for one extra

period and ceases after four years.

Figure 4: Percentage of extra productivity growth for first-time process

innovators over non-process innovators.

Note: NN stands for nearest-neighbours.

Our findings are consistent with existing empirical literature reporting a positive

impact of process innovations on productivity growth. Parisi et al. (2006), using a large

sample of Italian firms, provide evidence on the positive impact of the introduction of

process innovations on productivity growth, although they cannot fully address the self-

selection problems due to data restrictions. They found that the effect of the

introduction of process innovations on productivity growth is positive over a period of

three years. However, in their data, information on innovations is not available on a

yearly basis but every three years. Thus, they cannot evaluate the time span of this

effect. Gu and Tang (2003) provide empirical evidence, using a panel data sample of

Canadian manufacturing industries, that (different measures of) innovations have a

positive impact on productivity and that it takes from one to three years, depending on

19

the industry, for innovations to raise productivity. Lee and Kang (2007) also provide

evidence on a positive impact of process innovations on productivity growth using a

sample of Korean manufacturing firms. Griffith et al. (2006) estimate the structural

model of Crépon et al. (1998) using data from manufacturing firms in four countries.

They find that in the case of France the introduction of process innovations is on

average associated to a 6% increase in labour productivity (measured as sales per

worker). However, for manufacturing firms in Germany, Spain and the UK they do not

find this positive relationship between process innovations and productivity.

Notwithstanding, Griffith et al. (2006) note two shortcomings in their study: on the one

hand, they acknowledge that the lack of association between process innovations and

productivity for Germany, Spain and the UK could be due to the fact that they are

measuring revenue productivity deflated using industry deflators, instead of firm

specific deflators; on the other hand, as they only have cross-sectional data, they are

only able to recover correlations, and these are not necessarily casual relationships.

In the case of Spain, Huergo and Jaumandreu (2004) analyzed the productivity

growth impact of process innovations introduced by firms taking into account their

different ages, and using a sample of Spanish manufacturing firms. They found that a

process innovation induces (a contemporaneous) 1.5% extra productivity growth that

tends to persist although attenuated, for 3 additional years.14 Rochina-Barrachina et al.

(2008), using a sample of large and small Spanish manufacturing firms for the period

1991-1998, but without controlling for non-random selection into process innovation,

provide evidence on a contemporaneous impact of process innovations on firm

productivity growth, and found that this impact is larger and longer in the case of large

firms. Thus, compared to the related literature analysing the impact of process

innovations on productivity growth, when controlling for non-random selection into

process innovation using matching techniques, we obtain a positive effect that it is not

contemporaneous, but instead induces a one year delayed increase in productivity

growth, which lasts three periods.

6. Conclusions and policy implications.

In this paper we have provided panel data evidence on the causal links between the

introduction of process innovations and productivity growth for a sample of Spanish

manufacturing SMEs. First, using stochastic dominance techniques, we have found

evidence on the existence of non-random selection into the introduction of process

14 Huergo and Jaumandreu (2004) use the same dataset than ours but for the period 1990-1998 and including large firms. They measure productivity growth by means of the Solow residual and estimate a semiparametric model, with special focus on firm’s age.

20

innovations. Therefore, in order to assess the impact of introducing process

innovations on SMEs productivity growth, that is, to properly control for the direction of

causality from implementing process innovations to productivity growth, we have used

matching techniques, a methodology that explicitly takes into account this non-random

selection process. We have found that the introduction of process innovations yields a

delayed (not contemporaneous) extra productivity growth to a SME implementing a

process innovation for the first time, as compared to a SME that does not introduce

process innovations, and that the life span of this extra productivity growth has an

inverted U-shaped form. Thus, our results suggest that process innovations may be

considered as a strategic tool through which SMEs may enhance their competitive

position in the market by boosting productivity growth. This is especially important as

the competitive pressure intensifies as a result of increased globalization of markets.

These findings may serve to assist not only the design of management

strategies but also more effective policies to promote SMEs. From a strategic

management point of view, our results may be used to outline managerial

recommendations relating the rate and timing of introducing process innovations as a

strategic tool to boost productivity growth, and in turn, to improve the competitive

position of the firm in the market. Our findings also suggest that public policy should be

on support of innovative SMEs, and in particular, on undertaking and developing

initiatives aimed at facilitating SMEs the introduction of process innovations, such as

tax incentives, access to finance and grant schemes, and also incentives heading for

the maintenance and improvement of SMEs skills to innovate and to adapt and develop

new technologies. This issue is especially important in Europe since increasing the

share of innovative SMEs in the overall industrial sector is one of Europe’s major

challenges.

21

REFERENCES

Abadie, A., Drukker, D., Herr, J and G. W. Imbens, 2004, Implementing matching

estimators for average treatment effects in Stata, The Stata Journal, 4(3), 290-

311

Abadie, A. and G.W. Imbens, 2006, On the Failure of the Bootstrap for Matching

Estimators. NBER Technical Working Paper No. 325.

Acs, Z. J. and Audretsch, D. B., 1990, Innovation and Small Firms, Cambridge,

Massachusetts: MIT Press.

Aghion, P. and Howitt, P.,1992, “A model of growth through creative destruction”,

Econometrica, 60, 323-51.

Baldwin, J. R., 1997, “The importance of research and development for innovation in

small and large Canadian manufacturing firms”, Research Paper 107, Analytical

Studies Branch, Statistics Canada

Buckley, J.P. and Mirza, H., 1997, “Introduction”, in International Technology Transfer

by Small and Medium Sized Enterprises, Buckley, J.P., Campos, J., Mirza, H.,

White, E. (eds.), Macmillan: Houndmills, UK, 1-5.

Caves, D.W., L.R. Christensen and E. Diewert, 1982, ‘Multilateral comparisons of

output, input and productivity using superlative index numbers’, Economic

Journal 92, 73-86.

Cohen, W. M. and Klepper, S. (1996). Firm size and the nature of innovation within

industries: The case of process and product R&D. Review of Economics and

Statistics 78, 232-243

Crépon, B., Duguet, E. and Mairesse, J., 1998, “Research, Innovation and Productivity:

An Econometric Analysis at the Firm Level”, Economics of Innovation and New

Technology, 7, 115-158.

Davies, S., 1979, The Diffusion of Process Innovations, Cambridge University Press,

Cambridge.

Delgado, M.J., J.C. Fariñas, and S. Ruano, 2002, “SMEs’ productivity and the export

markets,” Journal of International Economics, 57, 397-422.

Ericson, R. and Pakes, A. (1992), “An alternative theory of firm and industry dynamics”,

Cowles Foundation Discussion Papers 1041, Yale University.

Ericson, R. and Pakes, A. (1995), “Markov-perfect industry dynamics: a framework for

empirical work”, Review of Economic Studies, 62, 53-82.

González, X. and Jaumandreu, J. (1998), “Threshold effects in product R&D decisions:

Theoretical framework and empirical analysis”, Studies on the Spanish

Economy, FEDEA.

22

González, X., Jaumandreu, J. and Pazó, C., (1999), “Innovación, costes irrecuperables

e incentivos a la I+D”, Papeles de Economía Española, 81, 155-166.

Good, D., Nadiri, I. M. & Sickles, R. (1996). Index number and factor demand

approaches to the estimation of productivity. NBER working paper 5790.

Griffith, R., Huergo, E., Mairesse, J. and Peters, B. (2006), ‘Innovation and productivity

across four European countries’, Oxford Review of Economic Policy 22(4), pp.

483-498.

Griliches, Z. (1979), “Issues in assessing the contribution of R&D to productivity

growth”, Bell Journal of Economics, 10, 92-116.

Gu, W. and Tang, J. (2003). The link between innovation and productivity in Canadian

manufacturing industries. Working Paper number 38, Industry Canada

Research Publication Programme.

Hall, B. (1990). The impact of corporate restructuring on industrial R&D. Brookings

Papers on Economic Activity: Microeconomics, 85-124.

Handcock, M.S., and M. Morris, 1999, “Relative distribution methods in the social

sciences”, New York: Springer-Verlag.

Heckman, J., H. Ichimura and P. Todd, 1997, “Matching as an econometric evaluation

estimator”, Review of Economic Studies, 65, 261-294.

Huergo, E. and Jaumandreu, J. (2004), “Firm´s age, process innovation and

productivity growth”, International Journal of Industrial Organisation, 22, 541-

559.

Klette, T. J. and Johansen, F. (1998). Accumulation of R&D capital and dynamic firm

performance: A not-so-fixed effect model. Annales d’ Economie et de

Statistique, 49/50, 389-419.

Lee, K., and Kang, S.M., 2007, “Innovation types and productivity growth: evidence

from Korean manufacturing SMEs”, Global Economic Review, 36, 343-359.

Leuven, E, and B. Sianesi, 2003. “PSMATCH2: Stata module to perform full

Mahalanobis and propensity score matching, common support graphing, and

covariate imbalance testing”, Statistical Software Components S432001, Boston

College Department of Economics, revised 28 Dec 2006.

Máñez, J.A., Rincón, A., Rochina, M.E. and Sanchis, J.A., 2005, “Productividad e I+D:

Un análisis no paramétrico”, Revista de Economía Aplicada, 39, 47-86.

Máñez, J. A., Rochina, M. E., Sanchis, A. and Sanchis, J. A., 2009, “The role of sunks

costs in the decision to invest n R&D”, Journal of Industrial Economics,

forthcoming.

Pakes A. & Ericson, R. (1998), “Empirical implications of alternative models of firm

dynamics”, Journal of Economic Theory, 79, 1-45.

23

Parisi, M. L., Schiantarelli, F. and Sembenelli, A. (2006), “Productivity, innovation and

R&D: Micro evidence for Italy”, European Economic Review, 50, 2037-2061.

Pavitt, K., Robson, M., Townsend, J., 1987, “The size distribution of innovating firms in

the UK: 145-983”, Journal of Industrial Economics, 35, 91-316.

Politis, D.N., Romano ,J.P., and Wolf, M., 1999, Subsampling, Springer-Verlag, New

York.

Rochina-Barrachina, M.E., Máñez, J.A. and Sanchis-Llopis J.A., 2008, “Process

innovations and firm productivity growth”, Small Business Economics, DOI

10.1007/s11187-008-9110-5.

Romer, P., 1990, “Endogenous technological change”, Journal of Political Economy,

98-102.

Rosenbaum, P.R., and D. Rubin, 1983, “The central role of the propensity score in

observational studies for causal effects”, Biometrika, 70, 41-55.

Rosenbaum, P.R., and Rubin, D.B., 1985, "Constructing a control group using

multivariate matched sampling methods that incorporate the propensity score",

The American Statistician, 39 (1), 33 - 38.

Scherer, F.M., 1991, “Changing perspectives on the firm problem”, in Acs, Z. and

Audretsch, D. (eds.), Innovation and Technological Change, Harvester

Wheatsheaf, New York.

Schumpeter, J. A., 1934, The Theory of Economic Development, Harvard University

Press, Cambridge, MA.

Schumpeter, J. A., 1942, Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy, New York: Harper and

Row.

Smolny, W. (1998). Innovations, prices and employment: A theoretical model and an

empirical application for West German manufacturing firms. The Journal of

Industrial Economics, 3, 359-381.

Sutton, J. (1991). Sunk Costs and Market Structure. Massachussets: MIT Press.

Verspagen, B. (1999). European Regional Clubs: Do They Exist and Where Are They

Heading? On the Economic and Technological Differences between European

Regions. (In J. Adams and F. Pigliaru (Eds.), Economic Growth and Change:

National and Regional Patterns of Convergence and Divergence. Cheltenham:

Edward Elgar.)

24

Appendix

Table A.1. The determinants of becoming a first-time process innovator.

Probit regression of the probability of becoming

a first-time process innovator

Export Intensityt-1 0.1669 (0.055)***

Significant market sharet-1 0.0183 (0.022)

log(employment)t-1 0.0384 (0.014)***

log(TFP)t-1 0.1086 (0.042)***

Advertising intensityt-1 0.9934 (0.686)

Foreign capital participationt-1 -0.0022 (0.036)

Legal formt-1 0.0578 (0.023)***

R&D Intensityt-1 3.3588 (1.249)***

Complementary R&D activitiest-1 0.0832 (0.024)*** Age -0.0159 (0.001)**

Number observations 1663 Notes:

(1) Marginal effects: * significant at 10%, ** significant at 5% and *** significant at 1%. (2) Robust standard errors in parentheses. (3) The regression includes year dummies and 2-digit industry dummies.

FUNDACIÓN DE LAS CAJAS DE AHORROS

DOCUMENTOS DE TRABAJO

Últimos números publicados

159/2000 Participación privada en la construcción y explotación de carreteras de peaje Ginés de Rus, Manuel Romero y Lourdes Trujillo

160/2000 Errores y posibles soluciones en la aplicación del Value at Risk Mariano González Sánchez

161/2000 Tax neutrality on saving assets. The spahish case before and after the tax reform Cristina Ruza y de Paz-Curbera

162/2000 Private rates of return to human capital in Spain: new evidence F. Barceinas, J. Oliver-Alonso, J.L. Raymond y J.L. Roig-Sabaté

163/2000 El control interno del riesgo. Una propuesta de sistema de límites riesgo neutral Mariano González Sánchez

164/2001 La evolución de las políticas de gasto de las Administraciones Públicas en los años 90 Alfonso Utrilla de la Hoz y Carmen Pérez Esparrells

165/2001 Bank cost efficiency and output specification Emili Tortosa-Ausina

166/2001 Recent trends in Spanish income distribution: A robust picture of falling income inequality Josep Oliver-Alonso, Xavier Ramos y José Luis Raymond-Bara

167/2001 Efectos redistributivos y sobre el bienestar social del tratamiento de las cargas familiares en el nuevo IRPF Nuria Badenes Plá, Julio López Laborda, Jorge Onrubia Fernández

168/2001 The Effects of Bank Debt on Financial Structure of Small and Medium Firms in some Euro-pean Countries Mónica Melle-Hernández

169/2001 La política de cohesión de la UE ampliada: la perspectiva de España Ismael Sanz Labrador

170/2002 Riesgo de liquidez de Mercado Mariano González Sánchez

171/2002 Los costes de administración para el afiliado en los sistemas de pensiones basados en cuentas de capitalización individual: medida y comparación internacional. José Enrique Devesa Carpio, Rosa Rodríguez Barrera, Carlos Vidal Meliá

172/2002 La encuesta continua de presupuestos familiares (1985-1996): descripción, representatividad y propuestas de metodología para la explotación de la información de los ingresos y el gasto. Llorenc Pou, Joaquín Alegre

173/2002 Modelos paramétricos y no paramétricos en problemas de concesión de tarjetas de credito. Rosa Puertas, María Bonilla, Ignacio Olmeda

174/2002 Mercado único, comercio intra-industrial y costes de ajuste en las manufacturas españolas. José Vicente Blanes Cristóbal

175/2003 La Administración tributaria en España. Un análisis de la gestión a través de los ingresos y de los gastos. Juan de Dios Jiménez Aguilera, Pedro Enrique Barrilao González

176/2003 The Falling Share of Cash Payments in Spain. Santiago Carbó Valverde, Rafael López del Paso, David B. Humphrey Publicado en “Moneda y Crédito” nº 217, pags. 167-189.

177/2003 Effects of ATMs and Electronic Payments on Banking Costs: The Spanish Case. Santiago Carbó Valverde, Rafael López del Paso, David B. Humphrey

178/2003 Factors explaining the interest margin in the banking sectors of the European Union. Joaquín Maudos y Juan Fernández Guevara

179/2003 Los planes de stock options para directivos y consejeros y su valoración por el mercado de valores en España. Mónica Melle Hernández

180/2003 Ownership and Performance in Europe and US Banking – A comparison of Commercial, Co-operative & Savings Banks. Yener Altunbas, Santiago Carbó y Phil Molyneux

181/2003 The Euro effect on the integration of the European stock markets. Mónica Melle Hernández

182/2004 In search of complementarity in the innovation strategy: international R&D and external knowledge acquisition. Bruno Cassiman, Reinhilde Veugelers

183/2004 Fijación de precios en el sector público: una aplicación para el servicio municipal de sumi-nistro de agua. Mª Ángeles García Valiñas

184/2004 Estimación de la economía sumergida es España: un modelo estructural de variables latentes. Ángel Alañón Pardo, Miguel Gómez de Antonio

185/2004 Causas políticas y consecuencias sociales de la corrupción. Joan Oriol Prats Cabrera

186/2004 Loan bankers’ decisions and sensitivity to the audit report using the belief revision model. Andrés Guiral Contreras and José A. Gonzalo Angulo

187/2004 El modelo de Black, Derman y Toy en la práctica. Aplicación al mercado español. Marta Tolentino García-Abadillo y Antonio Díaz Pérez

188/2004 Does market competition make banks perform well?. Mónica Melle

189/2004 Efficiency differences among banks: external, technical, internal, and managerial Santiago Carbó Valverde, David B. Humphrey y Rafael López del Paso

190/2004 Una aproximación al análisis de los costes de la esquizofrenia en españa: los modelos jerár-quicos bayesianos F. J. Vázquez-Polo, M. A. Negrín, J. M. Cavasés, E. Sánchez y grupo RIRAG

191/2004 Environmental proactivity and business performance: an empirical analysis Javier González-Benito y Óscar González-Benito

192/2004 Economic risk to beneficiaries in notional defined contribution accounts (NDCs) Carlos Vidal-Meliá, Inmaculada Domínguez-Fabian y José Enrique Devesa-Carpio

193/2004 Sources of efficiency gains in port reform: non parametric malmquist decomposition tfp in-dex for Mexico Antonio Estache, Beatriz Tovar de la Fé y Lourdes Trujillo

194/2004 Persistencia de resultados en los fondos de inversión españoles Alfredo Ciriaco Fernández y Rafael Santamaría Aquilué

195/2005 El modelo de revisión de creencias como aproximación psicológica a la formación del juicio del auditor sobre la gestión continuada Andrés Guiral Contreras y Francisco Esteso Sánchez

196/2005 La nueva financiación sanitaria en España: descentralización y prospectiva David Cantarero Prieto

197/2005 A cointegration analysis of the Long-Run supply response of Spanish agriculture to the com-mon agricultural policy José A. Mendez, Ricardo Mora y Carlos San Juan

198/2005 ¿Refleja la estructura temporal de los tipos de interés del mercado español preferencia por la li-quidez? Magdalena Massot Perelló y Juan M. Nave

199/2005 Análisis de impacto de los Fondos Estructurales Europeos recibidos por una economía regional: Un enfoque a través de Matrices de Contabilidad Social M. Carmen Lima y M. Alejandro Cardenete

200/2005 Does the development of non-cash payments affect monetary policy transmission? Santiago Carbó Valverde y Rafael López del Paso

201/2005 Firm and time varying technical and allocative efficiency: an application for port cargo han-dling firms Ana Rodríguez-Álvarez, Beatriz Tovar de la Fe y Lourdes Trujillo

202/2005 Contractual complexity in strategic alliances Jeffrey J. Reuer y Africa Ariño

203/2005 Factores determinantes de la evolución del empleo en las empresas adquiridas por opa Nuria Alcalde Fradejas y Inés Pérez-Soba Aguilar

204/2005 Nonlinear Forecasting in Economics: a comparison between Comprehension Approach versus Learning Approach. An Application to Spanish Time Series Elena Olmedo, Juan M. Valderas, Ricardo Gimeno and Lorenzo Escot

205/2005 Precio de la tierra con presión urbana: un modelo para España Esther Decimavilla, Carlos San Juan y Stefan Sperlich

206/2005 Interregional migration in Spain: a semiparametric analysis Adolfo Maza y José Villaverde

207/2005 Productivity growth in European banking Carmen Murillo-Melchor, José Manuel Pastor y Emili Tortosa-Ausina

208/2005 Explaining Bank Cost Efficiency in Europe: Environmental and Productivity Influences. Santiago Carbó Valverde, David B. Humphrey y Rafael López del Paso

209/2005 La elasticidad de sustitución intertemporal con preferencias no separables intratemporalmente: los casos de Alemania, España y Francia. Elena Márquez de la Cruz, Ana R. Martínez Cañete y Inés Pérez-Soba Aguilar

210/2005 Contribución de los efectos tamaño, book-to-market y momentum a la valoración de activos: el caso español. Begoña Font-Belaire y Alfredo Juan Grau-Grau

211/2005 Permanent income, convergence and inequality among countries José M. Pastor and Lorenzo Serrano

212/2005 The Latin Model of Welfare: Do ‘Insertion Contracts’ Reduce Long-Term Dependence? Luis Ayala and Magdalena Rodríguez

213/2005 The effect of geographic expansion on the productivity of Spanish savings banks Manuel Illueca, José M. Pastor and Emili Tortosa-Ausina

214/2005 Dynamic network interconnection under consumer switching costs Ángel Luis López Rodríguez

215/2005 La influencia del entorno socioeconómico en la realización de estudios universitarios: una aproxi-mación al caso español en la década de los noventa Marta Rahona López

216/2005 The valuation of spanish ipos: efficiency analysis Susana Álvarez Otero

217/2005 On the generation of a regular multi-input multi-output technology using parametric output dis-tance functions Sergio Perelman and Daniel Santin

218/2005 La gobernanza de los procesos parlamentarios: la organización industrial del congreso de los di-putados en España Gonzalo Caballero Miguez

219/2005 Determinants of bank market structure: Efficiency and political economy variables Francisco González

220/2005 Agresividad de las órdenes introducidas en el mercado español: estrategias, determinantes y me-didas de performance David Abad Díaz

221/2005 Tendencia post-anuncio de resultados contables: evidencia para el mercado español Carlos Forner Rodríguez, Joaquín Marhuenda Fructuoso y Sonia Sanabria García

222/2005 Human capital accumulation and geography: empirical evidence in the European Union Jesús López-Rodríguez, J. Andrés Faíña y Jose Lopez Rodríguez

223/2005 Auditors' Forecasting in Going Concern Decisions: Framing, Confidence and Information Proc-essing Waymond Rodgers and Andrés Guiral

224/2005 The effect of Structural Fund spending on the Galician region: an assessment of the 1994-1999 and 2000-2006 Galician CSFs José Ramón Cancelo de la Torre, J. Andrés Faíña and Jesús López-Rodríguez

225/2005 The effects of ownership structure and board composition on the audit committee activity: Span-ish evidence Carlos Fernández Méndez and Rubén Arrondo García

226/2005 Cross-country determinants of bank income smoothing by managing loan loss provisions Ana Rosa Fonseca and Francisco González

227/2005 Incumplimiento fiscal en el irpf (1993-2000): un análisis de sus factores determinantes Alejandro Estellér Moré

228/2005 Region versus Industry effects: volatility transmission Pilar Soriano Felipe and Francisco J. Climent Diranzo

229/2005 Concurrent Engineering: The Moderating Effect Of Uncertainty On New Product Development Success Daniel Vázquez-Bustelo and Sandra Valle

230/2005 On zero lower bound traps: a framework for the analysis of monetary policy in the ‘age’ of cen-tral banks Alfonso Palacio-Vera

231/2005 Reconciling Sustainability and Discounting in Cost Benefit Analysis: a methodological proposal M. Carmen Almansa Sáez and Javier Calatrava Requena

232/2005 Can The Excess Of Liquidity Affect The Effectiveness Of The European Monetary Policy? Santiago Carbó Valverde and Rafael López del Paso

233/2005 Inheritance Taxes In The Eu Fiscal Systems: The Present Situation And Future Perspectives. Miguel Angel Barberán Lahuerta

234/2006 Bank Ownership And Informativeness Of Earnings. Víctor M. González

235/2006 Developing A Predictive Method: A Comparative Study Of The Partial Least Squares Vs Maxi-mum Likelihood Techniques. Waymond Rodgers, Paul Pavlou and Andres Guiral.

236/2006 Using Compromise Programming for Macroeconomic Policy Making in a General Equilibrium Framework: Theory and Application to the Spanish Economy. Francisco J. André, M. Alejandro Cardenete y Carlos Romero.

237/2006 Bank Market Power And Sme Financing Constraints. Santiago Carbó-Valverde, Francisco Rodríguez-Fernández y Gregory F. Udell.

238/2006 Trade Effects Of Monetary Agreements: Evidence For Oecd Countries. Salvador Gil-Pareja, Rafael Llorca-Vivero y José Antonio Martínez-Serrano.

239/2006 The Quality Of Institutions: A Genetic Programming Approach. Marcos Álvarez-Díaz y Gonzalo Caballero Miguez.

240/2006 La interacción entre el éxito competitivo y las condiciones del mercado doméstico como deter-minantes de la decisión de exportación en las Pymes. Francisco García Pérez.

241/2006 Una estimación de la depreciación del capital humano por sectores, por ocupación y en el tiempo. Inés P. Murillo.

242/2006 Consumption And Leisure Externalities, Economic Growth And Equilibrium Efficiency. Manuel A. Gómez.

243/2006 Measuring efficiency in education: an analysis of different approaches for incorporating non-discretionary inputs. Jose Manuel Cordero-Ferrera, Francisco Pedraja-Chaparro y Javier Salinas-Jiménez

244/2006 Did The European Exchange-Rate Mechanism Contribute To The Integration Of Peripheral Countries?. Salvador Gil-Pareja, Rafael Llorca-Vivero y José Antonio Martínez-Serrano

245/2006 Intergenerational Health Mobility: An Empirical Approach Based On The Echp. Marta Pascual and David Cantarero

246/2006 Measurement and analysis of the Spanish Stock Exchange using the Lyapunov exponent with digital technology. Salvador Rojí Ferrari and Ana Gonzalez Marcos

247/2006 Testing For Structural Breaks In Variance Withadditive Outliers And Measurement Errors. Paulo M.M. Rodrigues and Antonio Rubia

248/2006 The Cost Of Market Power In Banking: Social Welfare Loss Vs. Cost Inefficiency. Joaquín Maudos and Juan Fernández de Guevara

249/2006 Elasticidades de largo plazo de la demanda de vivienda: evidencia para España (1885-2000). Desiderio Romero Jordán, José Félix Sanz Sanz y César Pérez López

250/2006 Regional Income Disparities in Europe: What role for location?. Jesús López-Rodríguez and J. Andrés Faíña

251/2006 Funciones abreviadas de bienestar social: Una forma sencilla de simultanear la medición de la eficiencia y la equidad de las políticas de gasto público. Nuria Badenes Plá y Daniel Santín González

252/2006 “The momentum effect in the Spanish stock market: Omitted risk factors or investor behaviour?”. Luis Muga and Rafael Santamaría

253/2006 Dinámica de precios en el mercado español de gasolina: un equilibrio de colusión tácita. Jordi Perdiguero García

254/2006 Desigualdad regional en España: renta permanente versus renta corriente. José M.Pastor, Empar Pons y Lorenzo Serrano

255/2006 Environmental implications of organic food preferences: an application of the impure public goods model. Ana Maria Aldanondo-Ochoa y Carmen Almansa-Sáez

256/2006 Family tax credits versus family allowances when labour supply matters: Evidence for Spain. José Felix Sanz-Sanz, Desiderio Romero-Jordán y Santiago Álvarez-García

257/2006 La internacionalización de la empresa manufacturera española: efectos del capital humano genérico y específico. José López Rodríguez

258/2006 Evaluación de las migraciones interregionales en España, 1996-2004. María Martínez Torres

259/2006 Efficiency and market power in Spanish banking. Rolf Färe, Shawna Grosskopf y Emili Tortosa-Ausina.

260/2006 Asimetrías en volatilidad, beta y contagios entre las empresas grandes y pequeñas cotizadas en la bolsa española. Helena Chuliá y Hipòlit Torró.

261/2006 Birth Replacement Ratios: New Measures of Period Population Replacement. José Antonio Ortega.

262/2006 Accidentes de tráfico, víctimas mortales y consumo de alcohol. José Mª Arranz y Ana I. Gil.

263/2006 Análisis de la Presencia de la Mujer en los Consejos de Administración de las Mil Mayores Em-presas Españolas. Ruth Mateos de Cabo, Lorenzo Escot Mangas y Ricardo Gimeno Nogués.

264/2006 Crisis y Reforma del Pacto de Estabilidad y Crecimiento. Las Limitaciones de la Política Econó-mica en Europa. Ignacio Álvarez Peralta.

265/2006 Have Child Tax Allowances Affected Family Size? A Microdata Study For Spain (1996-2000). Jaime Vallés-Giménez y Anabel Zárate-Marco.

266/2006 Health Human Capital And The Shift From Foraging To Farming. Paolo Rungo.

267/2006 Financiación Autonómica y Política de la Competencia: El Mercado de Gasolina en Canarias. Juan Luis Jiménez y Jordi Perdiguero.

268/2006 El cumplimiento del Protocolo de Kyoto para los hogares españoles: el papel de la imposición sobre la energía. Desiderio Romero-Jordán y José Félix Sanz-Sanz.

269/2006 Banking competition, financial dependence and economic growth Joaquín Maudos y Juan Fernández de Guevara

270/2006 Efficiency, subsidies and environmental adaptation of animal farming under CAP Werner Kleinhanß, Carmen Murillo, Carlos San Juan y Stefan Sperlich

271/2006 Interest Groups, Incentives to Cooperation and Decision-Making Process in the European Union A. Garcia-Lorenzo y Jesús López-Rodríguez

272/2006 Riesgo asimétrico y estrategias de momentum en el mercado de valores español Luis Muga y Rafael Santamaría

273/2006 Valoración de capital-riesgo en proyectos de base tecnológica e innovadora a través de la teoría de opciones reales Gracia Rubio Martín

274/2006 Capital stock and unemployment: searching for the missing link Ana Rosa Martínez-Cañete, Elena Márquez de la Cruz, Alfonso Palacio-Vera and Inés Pérez-Soba Aguilar

275/2006 Study of the influence of the voters’ political culture on vote decision through the simulation of a political competition problem in Spain Sagrario Lantarón, Isabel Lillo, Mª Dolores López and Javier Rodrigo

276/2006 Investment and growth in Europe during the Golden Age Antonio Cubel and Mª Teresa Sanchis

277/2006 Efectos de vincular la pensión pública a la inversión en cantidad y calidad de hijos en un modelo de equilibrio general Robert Meneu Gaya

278/2006 El consumo y la valoración de activos Elena Márquez y Belén Nieto

279/2006 Economic growth and currency crisis: A real exchange rate entropic approach David Matesanz Gómez y Guillermo J. Ortega

280/2006 Three measures of returns to education: An illustration for the case of Spain María Arrazola y José de Hevia

281/2006 Composition of Firms versus Composition of Jobs Antoni Cunyat

282/2006 La vocación internacional de un holding tranviario belga: la Compagnie Mutuelle de Tram-ways, 1895-1918 Alberte Martínez López

283/2006 Una visión panorámica de las entidades de crédito en España en la última década. Constantino García Ramos

284/2006 Foreign Capital and Business Strategies: a comparative analysis of urban transport in Madrid and Barcelona, 1871-1925 Alberte Martínez López

285/2006 Los intereses belgas en la red ferroviaria catalana, 1890-1936 Alberte Martínez López

286/2006 The Governance of Quality: The Case of the Agrifood Brand Names Marta Fernández Barcala, Manuel González-Díaz y Emmanuel Raynaud

287/2006 Modelling the role of health status in the transition out of malthusian equilibrium Paolo Rungo, Luis Currais and Berta Rivera

288/2006 Industrial Effects of Climate Change Policies through the EU Emissions Trading Scheme Xavier Labandeira and Miguel Rodríguez

289/2006 Globalisation and the Composition of Government Spending: An analysis for OECD countries Norman Gemmell, Richard Kneller and Ismael Sanz

290/2006 La producción de energía eléctrica en España: Análisis económico de la actividad tras la liberali-zación del Sector Eléctrico Fernando Hernández Martínez

291/2006 Further considerations on the link between adjustment costs and the productivity of R&D invest-ment: evidence for Spain Desiderio Romero-Jordán, José Félix Sanz-Sanz and Inmaculada Álvarez-Ayuso

292/2006 Una teoría sobre la contribución de la función de compras al rendimiento empresarial Javier González Benito

293/2006 Agility drivers, enablers and outcomes: empirical test of an integrated agile manufacturing model Daniel Vázquez-Bustelo, Lucía Avella and Esteban Fernández

294/2006 Testing the parametric vs the semiparametric generalized mixed effects models María José Lombardía and Stefan Sperlich

295/2006 Nonlinear dynamics in energy futures Mariano Matilla-García

296/2006 Estimating Spatial Models By Generalized Maximum Entropy Or How To Get Rid Of W Esteban Fernández Vázquez, Matías Mayor Fernández and Jorge Rodriguez-Valez

297/2006 Optimización fiscal en las transmisiones lucrativas: análisis metodológico Félix Domínguez Barrero

298/2006 La situación actual de la banca online en España Francisco José Climent Diranzo y Alexandre Momparler Pechuán

299/2006 Estrategia competitiva y rendimiento del negocio: el papel mediador de la estrategia y las capacidades productivas Javier González Benito y Isabel Suárez González

300/2006 A Parametric Model to Estimate Risk in a Fixed Income Portfolio Pilar Abad and Sonia Benito

301/2007 Análisis Empírico de las Preferencias Sociales Respecto del Gasto en Obra Social de las Cajas de Ahorros Alejandro Esteller-Moré, Jonathan Jorba Jiménez y Albert Solé-Ollé

302/2007 Assessing the enlargement and deepening of regional trading blocs: The European Union case Salvador Gil-Pareja, Rafael Llorca-Vivero y José Antonio Martínez-Serrano

303/2007 ¿Es la Franquicia un Medio de Financiación?: Evidencia para el Caso Español Vanesa Solís Rodríguez y Manuel González Díaz

304/2007 On the Finite-Sample Biases in Nonparametric Testing for Variance Constancy Paulo M.M. Rodrigues and Antonio Rubia

305/2007 Spain is Different: Relative Wages 1989-98 José Antonio Carrasco Gallego

306/2007 Poverty reduction and SAM multipliers: An evaluation of public policies in a regional framework Francisco Javier De Miguel-Vélez y Jesús Pérez-Mayo

307/2007 La Eficiencia en la Gestión del Riesgo de Crédito en las Cajas de Ahorro Marcelino Martínez Cabrera

308/2007 Optimal environmental policy in transport: unintended effects on consumers' generalized price M. Pilar Socorro and Ofelia Betancor

309/2007 Agricultural Productivity in the European Regions: Trends and Explanatory Factors Roberto Ezcurra, Belen Iráizoz, Pedro Pascual and Manuel Rapún

310/2007 Long-run Regional Population Divergence and Modern Economic Growth in Europe: a Case Study of Spain María Isabel Ayuda, Fernando Collantes and Vicente Pinilla

311/2007 Financial Information effects on the measurement of Commercial Banks’ Efficiency Borja Amor, María T. Tascón and José L. Fanjul

312/2007 Neutralidad e incentivos de las inversiones financieras en el nuevo IRPF Félix Domínguez Barrero

313/2007 The Effects of Corporate Social Responsibility Perceptions on The Valuation of Common Stock Waymond Rodgers , Helen Choy and Andres Guiral-Contreras

314/2007 Country Creditor Rights, Information Sharing and Commercial Banks’ Profitability Persistence across the world Borja Amor, María T. Tascón and José L. Fanjul

315/2007 ¿Es Relevante el Déficit Corriente en una Unión Monetaria? El Caso Español Javier Blanco González y Ignacio del Rosal Fernández

316/2007 The Impact of Credit Rating Announcements on Spanish Corporate Fixed Income Performance: Returns, Yields and Liquidity Pilar Abad, Antonio Díaz and M. Dolores Robles

317/2007 Indicadores de Lealtad al Establecimiento y Formato Comercial Basados en la Distribución del Presupuesto Cesar Augusto Bustos Reyes y Óscar González Benito

318/2007 Migrants and Market Potential in Spain over The XXth Century: A Test Of The New Economic Geography Daniel A. Tirado, Jordi Pons, Elisenda Paluzie and Javier Silvestre

319/2007 El Impacto del Coste de Oportunidad de la Actividad Emprendedora en la Intención de los Ciu-dadanos Europeos de Crear Empresas Luis Miguel Zapico Aldeano

320/2007 Los belgas y los ferrocarriles de vía estrecha en España, 1887-1936 Alberte Martínez López

321/2007 Competición política bipartidista. Estudio geométrico del equilibrio en un caso ponderado Isabel Lillo, Mª Dolores López y Javier Rodrigo

322/2007 Human resource management and environment management systems: an empirical study Mª Concepción López Fernández, Ana Mª Serrano Bedia and Gema García Piqueres

323/2007 Wood and industrialization. evidence and hypotheses from the case of Spain, 1860-1935. Iñaki Iriarte-Goñi and María Isabel Ayuda Bosque

324/2007 New evidence on long-run monetary neutrality. J. Cunado, L.A. Gil-Alana and F. Perez de Gracia

325/2007 Monetary policy and structural changes in the volatility of us interest rates. Juncal Cuñado, Javier Gomez Biscarri and Fernando Perez de Gracia

326/2007 The productivity effects of intrafirm diffusion. Lucio Fuentelsaz, Jaime Gómez and Sergio Palomas

327/2007 Unemployment duration, layoffs and competing risks. J.M. Arranz, C. García-Serrano and L. Toharia

328/2007 El grado de cobertura del gasto público en España respecto a la UE-15 Nuria Rueda, Begoña Barruso, Carmen Calderón y Mª del Mar Herrador

329/2007 The Impact of Direct Subsidies in Spain before and after the CAP'92 Reform Carmen Murillo, Carlos San Juan and Stefan Sperlich

330/2007 Determinants of post-privatisation performance of Spanish divested firms Laura Cabeza García and Silvia Gómez Ansón

331/2007 ¿Por qué deciden diversificar las empresas españolas? Razones oportunistas versus razones económicas Almudena Martínez Campillo

332/2007 Dynamical Hierarchical Tree in Currency Markets Juan Gabriel Brida, David Matesanz Gómez and Wiston Adrián Risso

333/2007 Los determinantes sociodemográficos del gasto sanitario. Análisis con microdatos individuales Ana María Angulo, Ramón Barberán, Pilar Egea y Jesús Mur

334/2007 Why do companies go private? The Spanish case Inés Pérez-Soba Aguilar

335/2007 The use of gis to study transport for disabled people Verónica Cañal Fernández

336/2007 The long run consequences of M&A: An empirical application Cristina Bernad, Lucio Fuentelsaz and Jaime Gómez

337/2007 Las clasificaciones de materias en economía: principios para el desarrollo de una nueva clasificación Valentín Edo Hernández

338/2007 Reforming Taxes and Improving Health: A Revenue-Neutral Tax Reform to Eliminate Medical and Pharmaceutical VAT Santiago Álvarez-García, Carlos Pestana Barros y Juan Prieto-Rodriguez

339/2007 Impacts of an iron and steel plant on residential property values Celia Bilbao-Terol

340/2007 Firm size and capital structure: Evidence using dynamic panel data Víctor M. González and Francisco González

341/2007 ¿Cómo organizar una cadena hotelera? La elección de la forma de gobierno Marta Fernández Barcala y Manuel González Díaz

342/2007 Análisis de los efectos de la decisión de diversificar: un contraste del marco teórico “Agencia-Stewardship” Almudena Martínez Campillo y Roberto Fernández Gago

343/2007 Selecting portfolios given multiple eurostoxx-based uncertainty scenarios: a stochastic goal pro-gramming approach from fuzzy betas Enrique Ballestero, Blanca Pérez-Gladish, Mar Arenas-Parra and Amelia Bilbao-Terol

344/2007 “El bienestar de los inmigrantes y los factores implicados en la decisión de emigrar” Anastasia Hernández Alemán y Carmelo J. León

345/2007 Governance Decisions in the R&D Process: An Integrative Framework Based on TCT and Know-ledge View of The Firm. Andrea Martínez-Noya and Esteban García-Canal

346/2007 Diferencias salariales entre empresas públicas y privadas. El caso español Begoña Cueto y Nuria Sánchez- Sánchez

347/2007 Effects of Fiscal Treatments of Second Home Ownership on Renting Supply Celia Bilbao Terol and Juan Prieto Rodríguez

348/2007 Auditors’ ethical dilemmas in the going concern evaluation Andres Guiral, Waymond Rodgers, Emiliano Ruiz and Jose A. Gonzalo

349/2007 Convergencia en capital humano en España. Un análisis regional para el periodo 1970-2004 Susana Morales Sequera y Carmen Pérez Esparrells

350/2007 Socially responsible investment: mutual funds portfolio selection using fuzzy multiobjective pro-gramming Blanca Mª Pérez-Gladish, Mar Arenas-Parra , Amelia Bilbao-Terol and Mª Victoria Rodríguez-Uría

351/2007 Persistencia del resultado contable y sus componentes: implicaciones de la medida de ajustes por devengo Raúl Iñiguez Sánchez y Francisco Poveda Fuentes

352/2007 Wage Inequality and Globalisation: What can we Learn from the Past? A General Equilibrium Approach Concha Betrán, Javier Ferri and Maria A. Pons

353/2007 Eficacia de los incentivos fiscales a la inversión en I+D en España en los años noventa Desiderio Romero Jordán y José Félix Sanz Sanz

354/2007 Convergencia regional en renta y bienestar en España Robert Meneu Gaya

355/2007 Tributación ambiental: Estado de la Cuestión y Experiencia en España Ana Carrera Poncela

356/2007 Salient features of dependence in daily us stock market indices Luis A. Gil-Alana, Juncal Cuñado and Fernando Pérez de Gracia

357/2007 La educación superior: ¿un gasto o una inversión rentable para el sector público? Inés P. Murillo y Francisco Pedraja

358/2007 Effects of a reduction of working hours on a model with job creation and job destruction Emilio Domínguez, Miren Ullibarri y Idoya Zabaleta

359/2007 Stock split size, signaling and earnings management: Evidence from the Spanish market José Yagüe, J. Carlos Gómez-Sala and Francisco Poveda-Fuentes

360/2007 Modelización de las expectativas y estrategias de inversión en mercados de derivados Begoña Font-Belaire

361/2008 Trade in capital goods during the golden age, 1953-1973 Mª Teresa Sanchis and Antonio Cubel

362/2008 El capital económico por riesgo operacional: una aplicación del modelo de distribución de pérdidas Enrique José Jiménez Rodríguez y José Manuel Feria Domínguez

363/2008 The drivers of effectiveness in competition policy Joan-Ramon Borrell and Juan-Luis Jiménez

364/2008 Corporate governance structure and board of directors remuneration policies: evidence from Spain Carlos Fernández Méndez, Rubén Arrondo García and Enrique Fernández Rodríguez

365/2008 Beyond the disciplinary role of governance: how boards and donors add value to Spanish founda-tions Pablo De Andrés Alonso, Valentín Azofra Palenzuela y M. Elena Romero Merino

366/2008 Complejidad y perfeccionamiento contractual para la contención del oportunismo en los acuerdos de franquicia Vanesa Solís Rodríguez y Manuel González Díaz

367/2008 Inestabilidad y convergencia entre las regiones europeas Jesús Mur, Fernando López y Ana Angulo

368/2008 Análisis espacial del cierre de explotaciones agrarias Ana Aldanondo Ochoa, Carmen Almansa Sáez y Valero Casanovas Oliva

369/2008 Cross-Country Efficiency Comparison between Italian and Spanish Public Universities in the period 2000-2005 Tommaso Agasisti and Carmen Pérez Esparrells

370/2008 El desarrollo de la sociedad de la información en España: un análisis por comunidades autónomas María Concepción García Jiménez y José Luis Gómez Barroso

371/2008 El medioambiente y los objetivos de fabricación: un análisis de los modelos estratégicos para su consecución Lucía Avella Camarero, Esteban Fernández Sánchez y Daniel Vázquez-Bustelo

372/2008 Influence of bank concentration and institutions on capital structure: New international evidence Víctor M. González and Francisco González

373/2008 Generalización del concepto de equilibrio en juegos de competición política Mª Dolores López González y Javier Rodrigo Hitos

374/2008 Smooth Transition from Fixed Effects to Mixed Effects Models in Multi-level regression Models María José Lombardía and Stefan Sperlich

375/2008 A Revenue-Neutral Tax Reform to Increase Demand for Public Transport Services Carlos Pestana Barros and Juan Prieto-Rodriguez

376/2008 Measurement of intra-distribution dynamics: An application of different approaches to the Euro-pean regions Adolfo Maza, María Hierro and José Villaverde

377/2008 Migración interna de extranjeros y ¿nueva fase en la convergencia? María Hierro y Adolfo Maza

378/2008 Efectos de la Reforma del Sector Eléctrico: Modelización Teórica y Experiencia Internacional Ciro Eduardo Bazán Navarro

379/2008 A Non-Parametric Independence Test Using Permutation Entropy Mariano Matilla-García and Manuel Ruiz Marín

380/2008 Testing for the General Fractional Unit Root Hypothesis in the Time Domain Uwe Hassler, Paulo M.M. Rodrigues and Antonio Rubia

381/2008 Multivariate gram-charlier densities Esther B. Del Brio, Trino-Manuel Ñíguez and Javier Perote

382/2008 Analyzing Semiparametrically the Trends in the Gender Pay Gap - The Example of Spain Ignacio Moral-Arce, Stefan Sperlich, Ana I. Fernández-Saínz and Maria J. Roca

383/2008 A Cost-Benefit Analysis of a Two-Sided Card Market Santiago Carbó Valverde, David B. Humphrey, José Manuel Liñares Zegarra and Francisco Rod-riguez Fernandez

384/2008 A Fuzzy Bicriteria Approach for Journal Deselection in a Hospital Library M. L. López-Avello, M. V. Rodríguez-Uría, B. Pérez-Gladish, A. Bilbao-Terol, M. Arenas-Parra

385/2008 Valoración de las grandes corporaciones farmaceúticas, a través del análisis de sus principales intangibles, con el método de opciones reales Gracia Rubio Martín y Prosper Lamothe Fernández

386/2008 El marketing interno como impulsor de las habilidades comerciales de las pyme españolas: efectos en los resultados empresariales Mª Leticia Santos Vijande, Mª José Sanzo Pérez, Nuria García Rodríguez y Juan A. Trespalacios Gutiérrez

387/2008 Understanding Warrants Pricing: A case study of the financial market in Spain David Abad y Belén Nieto

388/2008 Aglomeración espacial, Potencial de Mercado y Geografía Económica: Una revisión de la litera-tura Jesús López-Rodríguez y J. Andrés Faíña

389/2008 An empirical assessment of the impact of switching costs and first mover advantages on firm performance Jaime Gómez, Juan Pablo Maícas

390/2008 Tender offers in Spain: testing the wave Ana R. Martínez-Cañete y Inés Pérez-Soba Aguilar

391/2008 La integración del mercado español a finales del siglo XIX: los precios del trigo entre 1891 y 1905 Mariano Matilla García, Pedro Pérez Pascual y Basilio Sanz Carnero

392/2008 Cuando el tamaño importa: estudio sobre la influencia de los sujetos políticos en la balanza de bienes y servicios Alfonso Echazarra de Gregorio

393/2008 Una visión cooperativa de las medidas ante el posible daño ambiental de la desalación Borja Montaño Sanz

394/2008 Efectos externos del endeudamiento sobre la calificación crediticia de las Comunidades Autóno-mas Andrés Leal Marcos y Julio López Laborda

395/2008 Technical efficiency and productivity changes in Spanish airports: A parametric distance func-tions approach Beatriz Tovar & Roberto Rendeiro Martín-Cejas

396/2008 Network analysis of exchange data: Interdependence drives crisis contagion David Matesanz Gómez & Guillermo J. Ortega

397/2008 Explaining the performance of Spanish privatised firms: a panel data approach Laura Cabeza Garcia and Silvia Gomez Anson

398/2008 Technological capabilities and the decision to outsource R&D services Andrea Martínez-Noya and Esteban García-Canal

399/2008 Hybrid Risk Adjustment for Pharmaceutical Benefits Manuel García-Goñi, Pere Ibern & José María Inoriza

400/2008 The Team Consensus–Performance Relationship and the Moderating Role of Team Diversity José Henrique Dieguez, Javier González-Benito and Jesús Galende

401/2008 The institutional determinants of CO2 emissions: A computational modelling approach using Arti-ficial Neural Networks and Genetic Programming Marcos Álvarez-Díaz , Gonzalo Caballero Miguez and Mario Soliño

402/2008 Alternative Approaches to Include Exogenous Variables in DEA Measures: A Comparison Using Monte Carlo José Manuel Cordero-Ferrera, Francisco Pedraja-Chaparro and Daniel Santín-González

403/2008 Efecto diferencial del capital humano en el crecimiento económico andaluz entre 1985 y 2004: comparación con el resto de España Mª del Pópulo Pablo-Romero Gil-Delgado y Mª de la Palma Gómez-Calero Valdés

404/2008 Análisis de fusiones, variaciones conjeturales y la falacia del estimador en diferencias Juan Luis Jiménez y Jordi Perdiguero

405/2008 Política fiscal en la uem: ¿basta con los estabilizadores automáticos? Jorge Uxó González y Mª Jesús Arroyo Fernández

406/2008 Papel de la orientación emprendedora y la orientación al mercado en el éxito de las empresas Óscar González-Benito, Javier González-Benito y Pablo A. Muñoz-Gallego

407/2008 La presión fiscal por impuesto sobre sociedades en la unión europea Elena Fernández Rodríguez, Antonio Martínez Arias y Santiago Álvarez García

408/2008 The environment as a determinant factor of the purchasing and supply strategy: an empirical ana-lysis Dr. Javier González-Benito y MS Duilio Reis da Rocha

409/2008 Cooperation for innovation: the impact on innovatory effort Gloria Sánchez González and Liliana Herrera

410/2008 Spanish post-earnings announcement drift and behavioral finance models Carlos Forner and Sonia Sanabria

411/2008 Decision taking with external pressure: evidence on football manager dismissals in argentina and their consequences Ramón Flores, David Forrest and Juan de Dios Tena

412/2008 Comercio agrario latinoamericano, 1963-2000: aplicación de la ecuación gravitacional para flujos desagregados de comercio Raúl Serrano y Vicente Pinilla

413/2008 Voter heuristics in Spain: a descriptive approach elector decision José Luís Sáez Lozano and Antonio M. Jaime Castillo

414/2008 Análisis del efecto área de salud de residencia sobre la utilización y acceso a los servicios sanita-rios en la Comunidad Autónoma Canaria Ignacio Abásolo Alessón, Lidia García Pérez, Raquel Aguiar Ibáñez y Asier Amador Robayna

415/2008 Impact on competitive balance from allowing foreign players in a sports league: an analytical model and an empirical test Ramón Flores, David Forrest & Juan de Dios Tena

416/2008 Organizational innovation and productivity growth: Assessing the impact of outsourcing on firm performance Alberto López

417/2008 Value Efficiency Analysis of Health Systems Eduardo González, Ana Cárcaba & Juan Ventura

418/2008 Equidad en la utilización de servicios sanitarios públicos por comunidades autónomas en España: un análisis multinivel Ignacio Abásolo, Jaime Pinilla, Miguel Negrín, Raquel Aguiar y Lidia García

419/2008 Piedras en el camino hacia Bolonia: efectos de la implantación del EEES sobre los resultados académicos Carmen Florido, Juan Luis Jiménez e Isabel Santana

420/2008 The welfare effects of the allocation of airlines to different terminals M. Pilar Socorro and Ofelia Betancor

421/2008 How bank capital buffers vary across countries. The influence of cost of deposits, market power and bank regulation Ana Rosa Fonseca and Francisco González

422/2008 Analysing health limitations in spain: an empirical approach based on the european community household panel Marta Pascual and David Cantarero

423/2008 Regional productivity variation and the impact of public capital stock: an analysis with spatial interaction, with reference to Spain Miguel Gómez-Antonio and Bernard Fingleton

424/2008 Average effect of training programs on the time needed to find a job. The case of the training schools program in the south of Spain (Seville, 1997-1999). José Manuel Cansino Muñoz-Repiso and Antonio Sánchez Braza

425/2008 Medición de la eficiencia y cambio en la productividad de las empresas distribuidoras de electri-cidad en Perú después de las reformas Raúl Pérez-Reyes y Beatriz Tovar

426/2008 Acercando posturas sobre el descuento ambiental: sondeo Delphi a expertos en el ámbito interna-cional Carmen Almansa Sáez y José Miguel Martínez Paz

427/2008 Determinants of abnormal liquidity after rating actions in the Corporate Debt Market Pilar Abad, Antonio Díaz and M. Dolores Robles

428/2008 Export led-growth and balance of payments constrained. New formalization applied to Cuban commercial regimes since 1960 David Matesanz Gómez, Guadalupe Fugarolas Álvarez-Ude and Isis Mañalich Gálvez

429/2008 La deuda implícita y el desequilibrio financiero-actuarial de un sistema de pensiones. El caso del régimen general de la seguridad social en España José Enrique Devesa Carpio y Mar Devesa Carpio

430/2008 Efectos de la descentralización fiscal sobre el precio de los carburantes en España Desiderio Romero Jordán, Marta Jorge García-Inés y Santiago Álvarez García

431/2008 Euro, firm size and export behavior Silviano Esteve-Pérez, Salvador Gil-Pareja, Rafael Llorca-Vivero and José Antonio Martínez-Serrano

432/2008 Does social spending increase support for free trade in advanced democracies? Ismael Sanz, Ferran Martínez i Coma and Federico Steinberg

433/2008 Potencial de Mercado y Estructura Espacial de Salarios: El Caso de Colombia Jesús López-Rodríguez y Maria Cecilia Acevedo

434/2008 Persistence in Some Energy Futures Markets Juncal Cunado, Luis A. Gil-Alana and Fernando Pérez de Gracia

435/2008 La inserción financiera externa de la economía francesa: inversores institucionales y nueva gestión empresarial Ignacio Álvarez Peralta

436/2008 ¿Flexibilidad o rigidez salarial en España?: un análisis a escala regional Ignacio Moral Arce y Adolfo Maza Fernández

437/2009 Intangible relationship-specific investments and the performance of r&d outsourcing agreements Andrea Martínez-Noya, Esteban García-Canal & Mauro F. Guillén

438/2009 Friendly or Controlling Boards? Pablo de Andrés Alonso & Juan Antonio Rodríguez Sanz

439/2009 La sociedad Trenor y Cía. (1838-1926): un modelo de negocio industrial en la España del siglo XIX Amparo Ruiz Llopis

440/2009 Continental bias in trade Salvador Gil-Pareja, Rafael Llorca-Vivero & José Antonio Martínez Serrano

441/2009 Determining operational capital at risk: an empirical application to the retail banking Enrique José Jiménez-Rodríguez, José Manuel Feria-Domínguez & José Luis Martín-Marín

442/2009 Costes de mitigación y escenarios post-kyoto en España: un análisis de equilibro general para España Mikel González Ruiz de Eguino

443/2009 Las revistas españolas de economía en las bibliotecas universitarias: ranking, valoración del indicador y del sistema Valentín Edo Hernández

444/2009 Convergencia económica en España y coordinación de políticas económicas. un estudio basado en la estructura productiva de las CC.AA. Ana Cristina Mingorance Arnáiz

445/2009 Instrumentos de mercado para reducir emisiones de co2: un análisis de equilibrio general para España Mikel González Ruiz de Eguino

446/2009 El comercio intra e inter-regional del sector Turismo en España Carlos Llano y Tamara de la Mata

447/2009 Efectos del incremento del precio del petróleo en la economía española: Análisis de cointegración y de la política monetaria mediante reglas de Taylor Fernando Hernández Martínez

448/2009 Bologna Process and Expenditure on Higher Education: A Convergence Analysis of the EU-15 T. Agasisti, C. Pérez Esparrells, G. Catalano & S. Morales

449/2009 Global Economy Dynamics? Panel Data Approach to Spillover Effects Gregory Daco, Fernando Hernández Martínez & Li-Wu Hsu

450/2009 Pricing levered warrants with dilution using observable variables Isabel Abínzano & Javier F. Navas

451/2009 Information technologies and financial prformance: The effect of technology diffusion among competitors Lucio Fuentelsaz, Jaime Gómez & Sergio Palomas

452/2009 A Detailed Comparison of Value at Risk in International Stock Exchanges Pilar Abad & Sonia Benito

453/2009 Understanding offshoring: has Spain been an offshoring location in the nineties? Belén González-Díaz & Rosario Gandoy

454/2009 Outsourcing decision, product innovation and the spatial dimension: Evidence from the Spanish footwear industry José Antonio Belso-Martínez

455/2009 Does playing several competitions influence a team’s league performance? Evidence from Spanish professional football Andrés J. Picazo-Tadeo & Francisco González-Gómez

456/2009 Does accessibility affect retail prices and competition? An empirical application Juan Luis Jiménez and Jordi Perdiguero

457/2009 Cash conversion cycle in smes Sonia Baños-Caballero, Pedro J. García-Teruel and Pedro Martínez-Solano

458/2009 Un estudio sobre el perfil de hogares endeudados y sobreendeudados: el caso de los hogares vascos Alazne Mujika Alberdi, Iñaki García Arrizabalaga y Juan José Gibaja Martíns

459/2009 Imposing monotonicity on outputs in parametric distance function estimations: with an application to the spanish educational production Sergio Perelman and Daniel Santin

460/2009 Key issues when using tax data for concentration analysis: an application to the Spanish wealth tax José Mª Durán-Cabré and Alejandro Esteller-Moré

461/2009 ¿Se está rompiendo el mercado español? Una aplicación del enfoque de feldstein –horioka Saúl De Vicente Queijeiro, José Luis Pérez Rivero y María Rosalía Vicente Cuervo

462/2009 Financial condition, cost efficiency and the quality of local public services Manuel A. Muñiz & José L. Zafra

463/2009 Including non-cognitive outputs in a multidimensional evaluation of education production: an international comparison Marián García Valiñas & Manuel Antonio Muñiz Pérez

464/2009 A political look into budget deficits.The role of minority governments and oppositions Albert Falcó-Gimeno & Ignacio Jurado

465/2009 La simulación del cuadro de mando integral. Una herramienta de aprendizaje en la materia de contabilidad de gestión Elena Urquía Grande, Clara Isabel Muñoz Colomina y Elisa Isabel Cano Montero

466/2009 Análisis histórico de la importancia de la industria de la desalinización en España Borja Montaño Sanz

467/2009 The dynamics of trade and innovation: a joint approach Silviano Esteve-Pérez & Diego Rodríguez

468/2009 Measuring international reference-cycles Sonia de Lucas Santos, Inmaculada Álvarez Ayuso & Mª Jesús Delgado Rodríguez

469/2009 Measuring quality of life in Spanish municipalities Eduardo González Fidalgo, Ana Cárcaba García, Juan Ventura Victoria & Jesús García García

470/2009 ¿Cómo se valoran las acciones españolas: en el mercado de capitales doméstico o en el europeo? Begoña Font Belaire y Alfredo Juan Grau Grau

471/2009 Patterns of e-commerce adoption and intensity. evidence for the european union-27 María Rosalía Vicente & Ana Jesús López

472/2009 On measuring the effect of demand uncertainty on costs: an application to port terminals Ana Rodríguez-Álvarez, Beatriz Tovar & Alan Wall

473/2009 Order of market entry, market and technological evolution and firm competitive performance Jaime Gomez, Gianvito Lanzolla & Juan Pablo Maicas

474/2009 La Unión Económica y Monetaria Europea en el proceso exportador de Castilla y León (1993-2007): un análisis de datos de panel Almudena Martínez Campillo y Mª del Pilar Sierra Fernández

475/2009 Do process innovations boost SMEs productivity growth? Juan A. Mañez, María E. Rochina Barrachina, Amparo Sanchis Llopis & Juan A. Sanchis Llopis